VITHALRAO Vs. NEELESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri.Ravi B.Patil., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Ganesh S.Kalburgi., learned counsel for the respondent No.1 have appeared in person.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their ranking and status before the Trial Court.

(3.) The brief facts are these: The Plaintiff Dr.Neelesh S/o.Vilasrao Deshmukh filed a suit against his father Sri.Vilasrao S/o.Sadasivrao Deshmukh and brothers & sisters and also against the purchaser seeking the relief of Partition and Separate Possession by allotting 1/6th share to him in respect of land bearing Sy.No.48 measuring 11 Acres 1 Guntas situated at Bachpalli Village, Aurad-B Taluk, on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Aurad-Bidar District in O.S.No.57/2013. After the issuance of a notice, defendants 2 to 5 and 7 & 8 filed their written statements. Defendant No.6, the purchaser of the suit schedule property, also filed a detailed written statement and denied the plaint averments. Based on the pleadings, the Trial Court framed the Issues. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff moved an application seeking a direction to the sixth defendant to lead the evidence first as per Order 18 Rule 1 and Sec. 102 of the Evidence Act . The sixth defendant filed his objections to the said application. The Trial Court vide order dtd. 25/10/2019 considered the application and called upon the sixth defendant to begin with evidence at first and ultimately fixed the date for evidence of the sixth defendant on 31/10/2019. This order is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition.